obvious Child

How do we tell the difference between a candidate flip flopping for votes verse a candidate changing their beliefs due to new information on that belief and its relevant issues outside of voter opinions?

For instance, say that a candidate was for cloning but changed his position. How can we know if he changed his positions because voters were against cloning for religious reasons or if he educated himself and realized that cloning is a pretty grizzly in producing viable organisms?

It seems fundamentally wrong to bash a candidate who changed his position due to the later reason but it is acceptable to bash for flip flopping.

So how do we, as voters, tell the difference?

__________________
"They are the key to my eventual rise to the throne. Why would I abandon them?"

"Because I have asked you. And because your loyalty to our people should be greater than your ambition. And because I have poisoned your drink."

DeeJayH

you can't

they are all liars

__________________
These days it seems that the deadliest place on earth for an American to be is inside the womb. - Joshua P. Allem

obvious Child

So should we drop the entire flip flop issue entirely if we can't tell the difference?

DeeJayH

absolutely, unless its a democrat

obvious Child

LOL. Unless it's a politician!

Doc Howl

This is the correct answer.

__________________
Vigoth '08: Because the worm has turned.

DarkWizard12

I'll tell you; If a republican does it, its a flip flop, if a democrat does it, he is merely "educating himself".

aps

If the person provides a reasonable rationale for the change in stance, then it's a change in beliefs, IMO.

Iriemon

Funny, I don't remember the Republicans talking about Kerry educating himself at their convention in 04.

__________________
Matthew 5:9

DarkWizard12

But those were "conservative republicans" saying that. what about the "fair" MSM? And the liberals saying "he's not flip flopping at all!" riiight.